I have been thinking about this lately after a reader of my book pointed out to me that he felt prostitution should be made legal in order to give men more freedom from marriage and being tied down to a relationship in the hopes of getting sex. If prostitution were legal, men could get sex more readily and not be so dependent on getting involved with women. Given how dangerous it can be these days for men, between being called a rapist, a sexual harasser or a pervert, it makes sense that legal prostitution might be a good solution for some men that want to avoid the risks inherent in taking on a wife or long term (or short term) relationship with a woman. I looked at a couple of articles about why prostitution was illegal and found this article at Slate:

In 1999, Sweden made it legal to sell sex but illegal to buy it—only the johns and the traffickers can be prosecuted. This is the only approach to prostitution that’s based on “sex equality,” argues University of Michigan law professor Catherine MacKinnon.

It treats prostitution as a social evil but views the women who do it as the victims of sexual exploitation who “should not be victimized again by the state by being made into criminals,” as MacKinnon put it to me in an e-mail. It’s the men who use the women, she continued, who are “sexual predators” and should be punished as such.

….Sweden’s way of doing things is a big success. “In the capital city of Stockholm the number of women in street prostitution has been reduced by two thirds, and the number of johns has been reduced by 80%.” Trafficking is reportedly down to 200 to 400 girls and women a year, compared with 15,000 to 17,000 in nearby Finland. Max Waltman, a doctoral candidate in Stockholm who is studying the country’s prostitution laws, says that those stats hold up. He also said the police are actually going after the johns as ordered: In 2006, more than 150 were convicted and fined. (That might not sound like many, but then Sweden has a population of only 9 million.)

For feminists like MacKinnon (with whom Waltman works), this sure looks like the solution: Go after the men! Take down Eliot Spitzer and leave the call girls alone! On the other hand, the group SANS, for Sex Workers and Allies Network in Sweden, doesn’t like the 1999 law.

My question after reading this mind-numbing drivel? How can it be legal to sell sex but illegal to buy it? Who are you selling sex to if no men are allowed to buy it? Of course, any time one sees a feminist of the Catherine MacKinnon ilk, all logic goes out the window as long as men are rounded up and put in jail. This is sick, twisted logic and has no place in a free society. It was a group of women who apparently banned prostitution in the US according to this Wikipedia entry:

Originally, prostitution was widely legal in the United States. Prostitution was made illegal in almost all states between 1910 and 1915 largely due to the influence of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union.

Perhaps women don’t want the competition from prostitutes for resources from men? Or they just feel disgusted that a man might be able to get sex so easily? I do wonder if men were able to go freely to prostitutes without fear of jail time if it would free them sexually from female and (and state) control? Or do you think there would be more problems caused by it?

The accepted forms of prostitution (marriage & dating) are just milking a man's illusions.

When sex isn't involved - for instance a roommate situation - men are not as quick to let roommie just sit at home watching Dr Phil, while giving him a legal claim on your earnings and assets.

Sex and more importantly illusion are being sold in the accepted forms of prostitution.

I'm over 50, and my sex drive is finally starting to lessen. What I see through a clearer lens is stupid men (easy to take advantage of) and women who don't have many morals about using men like that. I have no idea how a housewife without kids can even justify her existence, but they not only justify it, they get downright demanding and bossy. And men work to pay for something like that.

Men will always have to pay for the good stuff one way, or another. Even James Bond bribed women with quail eggs, and I can't even spell the other goodies.

The real issue is mental. In a perfect world marriage is about a long lasting relationship that benefits both parties and is a secure place to raise children away from the evils of the world system. The destruction of marriage is just another part of the full court press to attack all things G-d given and to harm children. The false god of this world system is very smart and at war with mankind.

I'm not against legalizing prostitution, but I don't think for a second it would cause significant differences in gender relations. I'm a 24 year old virgin and thought of visiting a prostitute sounds about as appealing as necrophilia to me. Actually less so. If SHE doesn't want it, it isn't really any more fun than masturbation. Men are after emotional fulfillment and validation, not sex dolls. Else there would be mass migration to Vegas.

I doubt if marriage was all about sex....while it may have been that way for alpha males, for the vast majority of males, marriage was a forced institution for producing and taking care of children who would take care of them in their old age. Of course, things changed over time, but the whole origin of the institution of marriage and family was to provide a good foundation for children and to ensure that the next generation was better off than the current one. The original control was not over the mans sexuality, but on his money and I think even today, women marry only to get control over the mans money more than anything else.

Topic is almost already so five minutes ago. Real issues will come when you have the option of having your sex robot controlled by a remote professional (with a very sexy voice and a quality control panel...but I digress) with a full dossier on your preferences. The race to interpersonal uselessness between the sexes will accelerate. Guys with their bots and the girls in hourly OM sessions with theirs.

Just curious. Unlike all others up to that time who supported it, I commented on the proposition to legalize prostitution by opposing it as being harmful to the prostitute amongst others. Within a few hours my comment was gone as if it never existed. Was this a computer hiccup or was someone offended by my position?

Prostitution is trading dollars for sex. It's an impossible situation---like passing a law 'banning crime.' Slavery is a crime. Extortion is a crime. Blackmail is a crime. -Blackmail can result from participating in something legal that you'd rather not have found out. -Extortion demands money or else, the antithesis of trade. -Slavery is making that which was a person, property. -Engaging in activities w/ gross disregard to the safety of others is a crime.

Having sex outside of marriage is actionable, and can put the participant in a dangerous economic and societal position, certainly the latter. Being a cad isn't a crime. Being a s1ut isn't a crime.

The biggest problems with prostitution hardly concern sex. The successful in the profession are unknown. The less successful, of whom there are legions, live in a state of servitude to pimps, clients, drug dealers---usually all three.

Easier to prosecute activities that ARE crimes, rather than activities that lead to them. There. Everything clear as mud. But, wait, there's a little more..

Sorry I had to insult the intelligence of readers, but PJ's sensitivities aboutthe word 's1ut' disallow its use. Honestly.

I'm torn about it. In a secular society there's no moral basis for a double standard around prostitution and I think women's hypocrisy around this theme is very self-serving. But I think that prostitution is profoundly destructive to the institution of marriage and to gender relations generally. Obviously a lot of people don't care about that, but. It's really marriage that holds a society together, makes it prosperous and stable.

I am a New Yorker have lived in Thailand for 37 years have a family and 65 years old. 15 years ago I lost my one and only wife to cancer. After the mourning period I started seeing prostitutes because I didn't want to get into a relationship. I had two children at the time ages 3 and 9 when my wife died. It's the best thing I ever did get what I want from who I want at a price only 19th Century cowboys could get. My focus was my children raising them while holding down a demanding job, Country Manager for an insurance company. The women's rights movement back home would never stand for it as it takes the power away from the women and gives it to the man. Also vasectomy reversible should be an operation on every man's mind as this takes the power away from the women and lets the man control fertility. Do it with out your girlfriend's knowledge and if she comes up pregnant string her along until to birth and then leave her after the paternity test.

Sometimes the body heals a vasectomy. Don't be totally certain that the paternity test will come up negative. I'd recommend the paternity test as soon as possible.

The hate and resentment that would build up during the pregnancy would be toxic to a future relationship with your child's mother. You'd also spend most of a year making plans that would wind up going to zero or worse.

And, I can easily see a paternity suit going against the boyfriend, as I think you're common law married after 6 months anyway.